Get PJ Media on your Apple

Zombie

Monthly Archives: May 2013

Karl Marx Was a Tea Partier

May 28th, 2013 - 1:31 pm

If you think of yourself as a Marxist or a progressive, you need to read this. (Tea Partiers may want to steer clear.)

Marxist theory can be summarized in two distinct ways.

The first view (held mostly by its detractors) is that Marxism is little more than the politics of resentment — a philosophical justification for the hatred of success by those who failed to achieve it. The politics of resentment offers three different methods for bringing its program of economic jealousy to fruition: Under socialism, the unsuccessful use the power of government to forcibly extract wealth and possessions from the successful, bit by bit until there is nothing left; under the more extreme communism, the very notion of wealth or success is eliminated entirely, and anyone who seeks individual achievement is punished or eliminated; and finally under anarchy, freelance predators would be allowed to steal or destroy any existing wealth or possessions with no interference from the state. Marx himself saw pure communism as the ultimate goal, with socialism as a necessary precursor, and perhaps just an occasional dash of anarchy to ignite the revolutionary fires.

But there is another, more intriguing and less noxious, view of Marxist thought that gets less attention these days because its anachronistic roots in the Industrial Revolution seemingly render it somewhat irrelevant to modern economics. Marx posited that factory workers should own the factory themselves and profit from its output, since they’e the ones actually doing the work — and the wealthy fat cat “capitalists” should be booted out of the director’s office since they don’t really do anything except profit from other people’s labor. Marx generalized this notion to “The workers should control the means of production,” and then extended it further to a national scale by declaring that the overall government itself should be “a dictatorship of the proletariat,” with “proletariat” defined in this context as “someone who actually works for a living.” The problem with this theory in the 21st century is that very few people actually work in factories anymore due to exponential improvements in automation and efficiency, and fewer still produce handicrafts, and the vast majority of American “workers” these days don’t actually create anything tangible. Even so, there is an attractive populist rationality to this aspect of Marxism that appeals to everyone’s sense of fairness — even to those who staunchly reject the rest of communist theory. Those who do the work should reap the benefits and control the system; hard to argue with that.

Although the “factory” is no longer the basic building block of the American economy, Marx’s notion that “The workers should control the means of production” can be rescued and made freshly relevant if it is re-interpreted in a contemporary American context.

Visualize the entire United States as one vast “company,” with citizens as employees and politicians and bureaucrats as managers. Everybody, in theory, works together to make the company successful. But there are two realities which shatter this idealized theory: first, only about half the employees actually ever do any work, while the rest seem to be on permanent vacation or sick leave; and second, our bureaucratic “managers” — just like the wealthy fat cats in Marx’s vision — simply benefit from the labor of others without ever producing anything of value themselves.

Now, this “company” known as the USA doesn’t operate in the way traditional companies operate. In our system, we create only a single product every year, a gigantic pile of money we call the “Federal Budget.” Each “employee” is free to engage in any profitable activity or profession of his choice, just so long as at the end of the year he (or she, obviously) adds his earnings to the collective pile, setting aside a certain amount for living expenses. The “managers” then decide how this gigantic pile of money is spent, presumably to keep the company healthy and strong.

The formula to determine how much each employee gets to keep for living expenses is called “the tax code,” and those who contribute to the national product are called “taxpayers.” The managers deciding how the pile is spent are “politicians,” who are chosen every two years in a shareholders’ meeting called an “election.”

This system worked pretty well for quite a long time — until recently. It is only within the last few years that something remarkable happened: The number of contributing “taxpayers” in the country for the first time has fallen to approximately 50% of the population. Meanwhile, the number of unemployed, retired, disabled or indigent citizens grew, as did the number of citizens who earned so little in part-time or low-paying jobs that they paid no taxes, as did the number of people laboring in the untaxed underground economy, as did the number of bureaucrats.

Pages: 1 2 | 48 Comments bullet bullet

Progracists

May 8th, 2013 - 12:51 pm

What are “progracists”?

Progracists are people who continually classify individuals by “race” and yet can’t see how that is racist.

Progracists hate Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream of an America in which people “will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character,” because progressive policies are based on race consciousness, ethnic division, and identity politics.

Progracists keep minorities addicted to government benefits and entitlements specifically to make sure they remain poor and economically enslaved, and therefore a reliable voting bloc.

Progracists always seek to restrict everyone‘s freedoms because they think that’s the only way to stop minorities from misbehaving — at least the only way to control minorities without looking like you’re targeting them specifically.

Progracists call Americans “cowards” for not discussing race enough; but when we do discuss it, they call us racists.

Progracists still promote “affirmative action” policies even half a century after racial discrimination was outlawed in schools because progressives racistly think minorities will never be smart enough to get into college on their own merits.

Progracists routinely spew blatant racist slurs at any blacks who have conservative opinions, openly calling them “house niggers,” “Uncle Toms,” and so on, and yet somehow continue to imagine that they themselves would never be perceived as racist for doing so.

Progracists think black mothers are too ignorant to know how to feed their own children, so progracists pass nanny-state laws dictating what is allowable to eat.

Progracists want to ban standardized tests because progracists think black people are too stupid to pass them.

Progracists don’t want you to remember that the Progressive Movement originally promoted eugenics as a way to weed out “undesirables” from society, including and especially minorities and the mentally handicapped.

Progracists never condemn blatant racism exhibited by fellow progracists.

Progracists intentionally gutted the American education system because they believed that only by dumbing down school could they eliminate the racial “achievement gap.”

Progracists implement blatantly unfair “set-aside” policies which guarantee lucrative government contracts to otherwise under-qualified minority-owned businesses — only to then award those contracts to sham companies with token minority figureheads, further enriching the white progressives who actually own the companies.

Progracists governing white-dominated universities and corporations often foreground minorities in their promotional materials, allegedly to encourage “diversity” and tempt more minorities to apply, but in reality to disguise just how all-white their organizations really are.

Progracists gasp in horror at Rudyard Kipling’s notion of “The White Man’s Burden,” completely oblivious to the fact that every modern liberal do-gooder cause is a direct descendant of Kipling’s call to action.

Progracists deem “Islamophobic” anyone who tries to rescue Muslim women from an oppressive culture, because progracists simply don’t care about Muslim women.

Progracists facilitate and justify inner-city violence and unrest, hoping to use minority criminals as unwitting shock troops to destabilize society and thereby pave the way for a progressive totalitarian state — but in the process make life miserable for all the law-abiding minorities in ravaged neighborhoods.

Progracists don’t want you to know that the progressive hero Margaret Sanger sought to legalize abortion specifically to reduce the population of minorities in America, as part of a eugenics program to protect the racial purity of whites.

The “soft racism” of progressives’ lowered expectations for minorities ends up being more pernicious and corrosive than their formerly upfront racism because back then they were at least honest about it.

Progressive hero and Democratic president Lyndon Baines Johnson once explained his rationale for addicting African-Americans to welfare and government handouts by saying “I’ll have those niggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years.”

Democrat Woodrow Wilson was the first progressive president — and he also introduced racial segregation and Jim Crow laws to Washington DC, claiming segregation was beneficial to blacks because otherwise they would be out-competed by superior whites; he even used the White House to promote the film Birth of a Nation and especially its glorification of the Ku Klux Klan; despite all this (or perhaps because of it), Wilson remains an iconic hero to modern progracists.

After progressive Delaware Senator Joe Biden described Barack Obama as the “first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean,” Obama actually invited Biden to be his Vice President.

Shortly before he made the seamless transition from Klan leader to progressive politician, Democratic Senator Robert Byrd said, “Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.”

Progracist journalist Mike Wallace once said on camera that blacks and Hispanics were too busy eating “watermelons and tacos” to read the fine print on their insurance policies.

In an attempt to decrease the number of minority babies being born, progracists go to extreme lengths to make contraception available to girls at younger and younger ages, since black and Hispanic girls are getting pregnant at a much higher rate than girls of other races, threatening the progracists’ white majority.

Progracists promote open borders and mass immigration not for any humanitarian concerns about poor people in foreign countries but only because they see new immigrants as a huge voting bloc to keep progressives in power.

Progressives never criticize black entertainers for constantly using the “n-word” because progracists hold blacks to a lower social standard than everyone else.

Progracists want you to forget that some historians have defined the Ku Klux Klan as “the terrorist wing of the Democratic Party.”

Progracists think minorities in urban areas are too irresponsible to stop littering, so progressive-dominated local governments want to ban plastic bags for everyone even though most people don’t litter.

A growing number of African-Americans believe that progracists want to make abortion freely available to poor minorities specifically to commit slow-motion genocide of the black community.

Progracists always accuse everyone else of racism to deflect attention from their own racist policies and beliefs.